Explain to me how an atheist can declare 'anything' as 'immoral'?
GLOBALIST
The Tibetan spiritual leader spoke with Tutu on Saturday, answering questions via a video link, instead of attending an event to honour the South African anti-apartheid activist a day after his birthday.
His absence was symbolised by an empty chair at the event at the University of the Western Cape where he was meant to deliver an inaugural peace lecture.
The Dalai Lama told Tutu when asked why the Chinese feared him that "some Chinese officials describe me as a demon so naturally some fear about the demon."
He said hypocrisy and telling lies had unfortunately become part of life in "the communist totalitarian system" and people who spoke truthfully and honestly sparked discomfort.
Alias
You don't need a god to be moral or immoral, what else? Buddhists
believe in cause and effect, aka karma. Christians believe in miracles
(an effect with no cause) and, naturally, are denying reality.
BTW, early Buddhism, aka Hinayana, had a god, Lord Buddha, Heaven and
Hell along with 250 commandments for men and 500 for women. Priests were
celibate. If you were a good Buddhist, you went to heaven (nirvana) and
if you were a bad Buddhist you went to a hell that made the Christian
hell look like a nice walk in the park. Lord Buddha was up in the sky,
keeping score. Jesus traveled to India and came back with Hinayana
Buddhism, albeit watered down. The reason Sakyamuni taught Hinayana was
to prepare folks for the next steps, steps that Jesus didn't get to
learn and you refuse to learn due to your closed mind.
--
Alias
Jerry Okamura
turns out, what is moral or not moral is really dependent on what each
person feels is the morally right thing to do, or not the morally right
thing to do. That is dependent on each person. For instance, is it ever
the morally right thing to do, to intentionally kill another human being.
Some would say "yes" under certain circumstances, others would say it is
NEVER morally right. We just had a classic case of the morality question
when we killed Osama and that guy in Yemen. Was that the morally right
thing to do? Some would say, the answer is "yes" and others would say "no"
to that question. Who is right? Or are both right?
"GLOBALIST" wrote in message
news:22309156.1095.1318086034422.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqjw35...
GLOBALIST
mg
Whether you are a Ubangi in Africa, a Buddhist in Tibet, or an
8-year-old in a typical American family, truth is probably the most
important element of a person's moral or ethical belief system, or one
of them.
The problem with Christianity, for example, is that it is all based on
a lie. Christians lie to themselves and they lie to other people and,
ultimately, they have no sense of morality other than following their
god's instructions. If their god tells them to rape, pillage, torture
and murder, for example, they will rape, pillage, torture, and murder,
and if their god tells them to stop, they will stop. And that's what
Christians call morality, and they always claim they are displaying an
especially shining example of morality when they aren't killing or
torturing people.
GLOBALIST
Home schooling is catching on more and more because our public schools are nothing but detention centers for illiterates.
mg
<free....@gmail.com> wrote:
->>You are so full of shit...it ain't even funny. Take a look around
->>at your wonderful children raised by idiot parents who gave them no
->>standards or values. They are fucked up as hell. There is your
->>innate goodness. You are welcome to it. Home schooling is catching
->>on more and more because our public schools are nothing but
->>detention centers for illiterates.
You may use as an example, your most thoroughly programmed Catholic
choir boy who never even got a traffic ticket in his entire life and
grew up to be a preist, and didn't abuse little boys, but the fact
would remain that he is an immoral liar because the church he belongs
to is based on lies. That boy would have no sense of morality because
Christians who blindly follow what is passed off as god's instructions
have no sense of morality.
Nantz
> You are so full of shit...it ain't even funny. Take a look around at your wonderful children raised by idiot parents who gave them no standards or values. They are fucked up as hell. There is your innate goodness. You are welcome to it.
> Home schooling is catching on more and more because our public schools are nothing but detention centers for illiterates.
If morals were rated one to ten how would you rate yourself? I know
you wouldn't dare to say 10 because you feel you must at least show
some sense of humility. You would probably say 8, after thinking you
would prefer 9 but you knew that would seem too proud and you knew you
couldn't get by with that.
I sense that you missed bible school the day some certain sayings of
Christ were discussed, such as, "Judge not lest ye be judged", or how
about 'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone" or maybe "Do
unto others as you would have them do unto you".
I may be an atheist, but I know for certain that I am more of a
Christian than you. Much more. If Christ were to visit you today, he
would call you a hypocrite and kick your ass.
Now, where did you say you rate yourself?==============
GLOBALIST
Nantz
> Why would an imaginary Christ come to visit you? Keep to your own fairy tales and myths.
Visit me?? Are you crazy? The guy's been dead for almost 2000 yrs. I
assume he visited you. Were you sober?
===============
Rumpelstiltskin
A better question is "How can a theist declare 'anything' as
'immoral?"
Following instructions isn't being moral, it's at best just being
a good but unimaginative servant. Considering for oneself
how one wishes to interact with other people and with nature
makes for truly moral behaviour, though it might be "good" or
"bad" morality in some people's, or even most people's, eyes.
This is just not available to people who just try to do in
accordance with what they were told.
'Tis better to be vile than vile esteem'd,
When not to be receives reproach of being,
And the just pleasure lost which is so deem'd
Not by our feeling but by others' seeing:
For why should others false adulterate eyes
Give salutation to my sportive blood?
Or on my frailties why are frailer spies,
Which in their wills count bad what I think good?
No, I am that I am, and they that level
At my abuses reckon up their own:
I may be straight, though they themselves be bevel;
By their rank thoughts my deeds must not be shown;
Unless this general evil they maintain,
All men are bad, and in their badness reign.
-- Shake, sonnet 121
http://www.william-shakespeare.info/william-shakespeare-sonnet-121.htm
Thumper
from, We are not that weak.
Thumper
High Miles
has raised ?
None of the non theists I know now or have ever known were less than
moral or lacking in human kindness and compassion.
A hateful lump like the Glob couldn't approach their peace of mind or
happiness.
GLOBALIST
Shakespeare being a Roman Catholic, now documented by his signed in statements in Rome*, he would say that man is prone to evil and wars have been going on since. Can not even remember when the United States was not involved in a war.
*There was an underground railroad as such where RCatholics could travel out of the range of the Henry's zealots and continue their studies in Rome. Even then, like now, each country had a house of studies in Rome, where they lived and attended classes. English Papists had 'their ways' to avoid being notices while traveling.
Nantz
> Wonder how many wonderful, well balanced, successful children that idiot
> has raised ?
> None of the non theists I know now or have ever known were less than
> moral or lacking in human kindness and compassion.
> A hateful lump like the Glob couldn't approach their peace of mind or
> happiness.
================
I never thought about his children, but I have wondered about his own
childhood. Was he criticized all the time? Does he have to look for
what he perceives as bad in others to make himself look better?
Well,,,,, it isn't working.
=====================
High Miles
Just like the faith he raves about has left him bitter and hollow.
Rumpelstiltskin
<free....@gmail.com> wrote:
>That is a living definition of original sin"
Sorry you have to live in a fantasy version of original sin. I
don't. There is a real original sin IMV, which is eating animals,
but I still do it and there isn't any daddy to "forgive that sin
through which I run, and still do run though still I do deplore."
The religious fantasy that sex is the "original sin", is just
garbage.
The quotation is from Donne:
http://www.poetryoutloud.org/poem/173371
Thumper
Huh?
Thumper
Rumpelstiltskin
wrote:
My guess is that the "Henry" above is Henry VIII, who established
Protestantism, destroyed all the abbeys (and for that alone his name
should be rotten-bastarded eternally), and promoted vicious
persecutions of Catholics who would not convert. Elizabeth did the
same. Some of Shakespeare's extended family and most of his
wife's extended family died at Elizabeth's hands on trumped-up
charges motivated by Elizabeth's determination to continue the
suppression of Catholicism. Shakespeare himself is believed to
have had Catholic leanings. Fortunately for us, he wasn't devout
enough to put his life on the line for his beliefs, and get killed for
that.
Rita
What you don't mention is between Henry and Elizabeth there
was Mary sister of Henry. Who had remained a Catholic and
executed dissenters.
As the fourth crowned monarch of the Tudor dynasty, Mary is remembered
for her restoration of Roman Catholicism after the short-lived
Protestant reign of her brother. During her five year reign, she had
over 280 religious dissenters burned at the stake in the Marian
Persecutions. Her Protestant opponents gave her the sobriquet of
"Bloody Mary". Her re-establishment of Roman Catholicism was reversed
after her death in 1558 by her successor and younger half-sister,
Elizabeth I.
This was a very bloody time in English history. Six of one,
half dozen of the other so far as which side carried out
religious persecutions.
Rumpelstiltskin
I did think of her but decided not to include her to avoid
complicating the post. During her brief reign, she turned the
tables.
>As the fourth crowned monarch of the Tudor dynasty, Mary is remembered
>for her restoration of Roman Catholicism after the short-lived
>Protestant reign of her brother. During her five year reign, she had
>over 280 religious dissenters burned at the stake in the Marian
>Persecutions. Her Protestant opponents gave her the sobriquet of
>"Bloody Mary". Her re-establishment of Roman Catholicism was reversed
>after her death in 1558 by her successor and younger half-sister,
>Elizabeth I.
280 was small potatoes compared to Elizabeth, but Liz had
a lot more time. Given that 280 figure, Mary only averaged
about 50 victims per year, which is downright lazy for a
monarch of that age.
Jerry Okamura
or is that more likely to happen, with Americans who have NOT travelled
outside the United States?
"GLOBALIST" wrote in message
news:22764668.1204.1318092081636.JavaMail.geo-discussion-forums@yqjw35...
Jerry Okamura
who are religious?
"mg" wrote in message news:551197pdhg3efr2o3...@4ax.com...
Jerry Okamura
"mg" wrote in message news:un61971qarerk20pe...@4ax.com...
Are Christians any less immoral than everyone else?
mg
If you were a Christian and God told you to kill all your children and
all your neighbors, would you do it?
Jerry Okamura
"mg" wrote in message news:e5u897d8vdnmdipl0...@4ax.com...
Would God tell you to do that, since according to the ten Commendment's, he
supposedly says "thou shalt not kill"?
Rita
was poised and ready to do it -- at the last second God called off the
killing but praised Abraham for being ready to follow his orders.
Jerry Okamura
"Rita" wrote in message news:boi997l24f8cl37vg...@4ax.com...
So, GOD, like everyone else is a hypocrite?
mg
In doing a little research it looks like many people ascribe the
propensity of answering a question with another question, like Jerry
does, to the Jews. Presumably because they believe Jews are shifty and
never want to give anyone a straight answer. In doing a Google search,
I actually found a book entitled "Answering a Question with a
Question: Contemporary Psychoanalysis and Jewish Thought". I know
Jerry isn't Jewish, but I wouldn't be surprised if he could benefit
from some psychoanalysis, since he does it obsessively.
Here's some rather amusing examples of typical Jewish discussions:
�I see you got a �D� in physics.�
�Who am I, Einstein?!�
�What? Passing isn�t enough for you?�
"And my �A� in Viking Lit means bupkes?�
�From physics I�ll make a living? �
------------
MA: "A Mrs. Goldman in the beauty parlor mentioned there�s a youth
group at the shul, so you�ll run over now?"
ME: �Which Mrs. Goldman? Marvin�s mom?
MA: �So once he wore his pants on backwards?�
DAD: �Is she Marvin�s Mrs. Goldman?�
MA: �I ask questions under the dryer? What am I, a genealogist?!�
BUBBE: �A mother lets a son go out that way?!�
ME: �Can I finish my homework now?�
MA: �Why do I bother?�
-------------
ME: �Isn�t it a gorgeous day?�
MA: �So the sun is out. Should I do a cartwheel?�
ME: �I found a great used car!�
DAD: �And who can afford the insurance?�
ME: �It�s so nice out, why don�t we take a drive?�
BUBBE: �On Sunday? With the crowds? Who drives on a Sunday?�
ME: �I haven�t called in a week. So what�s new?�
ALL: �You didn�t wonder about Bubbe�s bursitis?�
ME: �Bursitis? Why didn�t you call me?�
ALL: �Why bother you?!�
Rita
<okamu...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote:
Or perhaps that is God's idea of a good joke? "Ha, ha, gotcha
Abraham-- you really thought I was serious? "